Talk:public domain

RFV

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

Rfv-sense: Not subject to any copyright or patent restrictions. Isn't this just an attributive form of the noun? ---> Tooironic (talk) 23:22, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Even when it's used predicatively? —CodeCat 23:24, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Maybe it would help if the definition for the noun actually made sense: "The feature of intellectual property being not protected under patent or copyright". Just try to substitute that into the phrase "in the public domain" and use it in a sentence! Chuck Entz (talk) 23:38, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

I think these are two different things. The noun public domain is the collective sense of all things to which no intellectual property can attach. By contrast, the adjective use is more often for individual works. Thus, a public domain book is a book in the public domain, but is not "the public domain", just as a book written in the French language is a French book, but is not the same as the noun, French. bd2412 T 19:41, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the definition for now. - -sche (discuss) 23:41, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Sense 3

The cite at sense 3 might possibly be the same thing as sense 1, in fact. It's hard to know. Equinox ◑ 12:06, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

RFV discussion: December 2021–January 2022

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

public domain

"The realm of published works, as opposed to unpublished tracts." There is one quotation in the entry (and arguably it doesn't fully support this definition as it says that the author did not refer to works not in the public domain, including "reports of limited circulation like those to licensing and funding agencies, and notes in newsletters" – but these are published works), but I have a feeling it is just an erroneous use of the term. (The entry is appearing as WOTD on 1 January 2022.) — SGconlaw (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

You have a problem, because I don't think this is going to pass, and it takes a full month before something can fail RFV (and 9 January is after 1 January) Kiwima (talk) 03:09, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

@Kiwima: it’s OK; the entry itself won’t look very pretty with the {{rfv-sense}} tag on it, but I’m not too fussed. I can omit the challenged sense from the WOTD using an ellipsis. — SGconlaw (talk) 04:24, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 20:22, 9 January 2022 (UTC)